Email this article to a friend

A UN report suggests that Washington’s latest air campaign against ISIS has led foreign militants to join the movement on 'an unprecedented scale.'

For a brief time after the 9/11 terror attacks, Americans could be heard asking the reasonable question: Why do these men from Middle Eastern countries (back then, mostly Saudis) hate us so much that they would give their own lives to cause us pain? Within a few weeks, the official explanation became: They hate us for our freedom, end of story.

When you follow the money, it is easy to understand why the government avoided any honest discussion of the causes of terrorism. By one estimate, U.S. taxpayers have squandered $10 trillion over four decades to protect the flow of oil on behalf of multinational corporations. The result is an empire of U.S. military bases which have garrisoned the Greater Middle East. In the Persian Gulf alone, the United States has bases in every country save Iran. These bases support repressive, undemocratic regimes, and act as staging grounds to launch wars, interventions and drone strikes. And they generate tremendous profits for defense contractors.

The existence of these bases helps generate radicalism, anti-American sentiment and terrorist attacks. The drone attacks have incited even more hatred for us, which should come as little surprise. The U.S. uses drones to incinerate suspected militants (and anyone else in the vicinity) on secret evidence, but only if they are living in Muslim nations like Pakistan, Yemen, Iraq or Somalia. We don’t fly killer drones over dangerous neighborhoods in Detroit or Chicago, or in Iguala, Mexico, where 43 students were recently massacred by gang members aided by corrupt police.

The fact that our misguided foreign policy creates terrorism is almost never discussed in polite society. There is of course no justification for a terror attack on innocents. But if our leaders truly cared as much about protecting Americans from terror as they do about protecting corporate profits, they would have an honest discussion of what’s prompting the violence.

The truth is that nearly every terror attack or threat to America by an Islamic extremist can be directly linked to “blowback” from our ventures in the Middle East. Osama bin Laden cited the presence of U.S. troops on Saudi holy land as a motivation for the 9/11 attacks. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev said the Boston marathon bombing was “retribution for the U.S. crimes against Muslims in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.” Faisal Shahzad said his attempted bombing in Times Square was “retaliation for U.S. drone attacks” in Pakistan, which he had personally witnessed. The underwear bomber, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, said that his attempt to blow up a U.S. airliner bound for Detroit was revenge for U.S. attacks on Muslims. Last month in Chicago, a teenager was arrested attempting to travel to Syria to join ISIS. He explained in a letter to his parents that he was upset that he was obligated to pay taxes that would be used to kill his Muslim brothers and sisters overseas. But when the Chicago Tribune told the story, it left this fact out, instead reporting that the teen had complained about the immorality of Western society.

And long before the Senate released its damning torture report, Al Qaeda and ISIS were using accounts of U.S. torture as a recruiting tool.

The truth about what is radicalizing Muslims to hate the West is rarely discussed in the mainstream press or in political debate. Instead, we are told by corporate-funded terror experts like the Brookings Institution’s William McCants and the Aspen Institute’s Frances Townsend that Islam is the origin of radical ideology. Anti-American jihadis supposedly learn to hate by reading the Koran and going to mosques. So one-sided is the discussion that even Bill Maher, a prominent liberal, has publicly described Islam as the “one religion in the world that kills you when you disagree with them.”

With the launch of our latest multi-billion-dollar war in Iraq and Syria, the United States has now bombed at least 13 countries in the Greater Middle East since 1980. A UN report suggests that Washington’s latest air campaign against ISIS has led foreign militants to join the movement on “an unprecedented scale.” This time, the terror experts haven’t bothered to pretend that we have a coherent plan or any chance of improving the dire situation in those countries. Still, they agree that ISIS militants’ anti-U.S. hatred originates with their Islamic faith and is unrelated to any U.S. actions.

As the novelist Upton Sinclair once observed: It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Total nonsense. There is no money in Somalia or in the Philippines and yet there is all sorts of violent radicalism. This is a tired terrible lazy argument.

Posted by Davis Goodman on 2015-02-15 09:33:27

It certainly represents his level of "class", in that it indicates he has none. Asswipe probably never met anyone who was actually an atheist, just gets his definitions supplied by Rush or Bill or Sean.

Same crap I used to put up with at work, listening all day to these "experts on all things atheist" describe who atheists are, how atheists feel about things, what their values are, whether they are moral or not, whether they support their nation, etc, etc, yadda yadda.

In the end I had to tell them I was tired of listening to them badmouth people they knew nothing about, that I was not only an atheist myself, but knew a whole lot of them, and that I figure that made me pretty much a REAL expert on what atheists are and what they represent, as I actually AM one. I offered to answer any questions they wanted to ask on the topic, figuring they must have a lot of them because what they were claiming about us was absolute hogwash and a joke. So I was offering them their opportunity to learn it straight from the Godless Socialist Liberal standing in front of them's mouth and correct the record.

Not one of them was interested in asking anything, because they all just KNEW they had the true story already, and hearing they were wrong from someone in a position to accurately judge their opinions on this didn't even rise to the level of a conscious concern in their "world". Nope, it's just another reason for them to consider atheists arrogant, because we attempt to dispel the preconceived notions of "they who know everything", because FOXNews or some other on-air, IQ-deprived moron told them they do. Whoever it was, they are even bigger idiots for filling the heads of these idiots with idiotic notions.

Posted by JohnnyD on 2015-01-23 00:41:30

This just in: "1% will own most of world's wealth by 2016." I wonder how the terrorist extremists will react when they realize that they are being played to perpetuate the need for arms by that very 1% . Probably no accident . . .

Posted by Cripes on 2015-01-20 07:05:05

How is the U.S. the cause of Muslim on Muslim terror? What about Boko Harum and the Muslim Brotherhood pogroms against Coptics in Egypt? American Christians founded the only secular universities in the middle east, provided heath care and disaster relief and pressured the English/French to give up their colonies. We have a mixed record but the fact is that one of the most basic tenants of the Koran is that it is a sin to live in peace with non Muslims. The Koran was written as a post facto apologia for the 7th century genocide of Jews and Christians in the Hijaz. We share responsibility but so long as Islam does not reject the violent and misogynistic beliefs at it's core it is not all the Wests fault.

Posted by jb on 2015-01-19 12:23:52

Bin Laden did not say any of the things, its a false state job.Collective lies.

Posted by Uzoozy on 2015-01-18 10:53:41

Who ever did it is immaterial , there were 110 million imported slaves sent, only 10 million arrived. Now people wear their cloaks of honesty and preach equality.In the world its have and have nots.

Posted by Uzoozy on 2015-01-18 10:45:58

Actually, he WAS a practicing Christian! You can disagree with his actions, as we all certainly should, but the church supported his rise to power (Pius is known by millions as "Hitler's Pope) & the church was at the center of helping Nazis escape justice. We don't have to like history, but it is the reality of what folks did.

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:40:20

there IS no "difference!"

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:33:46

Agree w you! Goodman is pointing out what has historically led to the rise of fanatical Islam. I'm w you, however, all the fairy tale believers that think that gives them to repress all the rest of us, should all go somewhere, beat each other up & leave the rest of humanity alone. The problem is that the rulers on all sides adopt the language/trappings of whatever the fairy tale most popular in their culture and use it to conquer/murder other folks!

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:30:40

do you realize that those spewing the ignorance (above) & trying to develop the "I've got GOOD religion---opposed to your BAD religion" narrative got all confused by your second line?

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:24:58

boo hoo!! they won't let me discriminate against everyone not like me officially anymore! The world's coming to an end because the majority of the world's people no longer support ignorance & are coming accept women, gays, others!

what a shame!!

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:21:25

every single negative position you cite has been strongly supported historically by the official Catholic, and other, Christian Churches. Historically, Islam WAS the more liberal of the two. Goodman correctly points out what has led to today's situation, where extreme, right wing, backward Islamists are using that religion to attack the west.

NEITHER should feel in any way vindicated! Both, and all the fairy tale religions, have supported brutal rulers, supported torture, murder and have suppressed women, science and progress!

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 16:18:13

you really have your own version of history/reality, don't you?

first of all, let's just not just skip over the revolution part, where the British offered freedom to American slaves if they'd join the side of the crown. that resulted in the largest slave upraising until that point in history. at the end of the armed conflict, thousands of former slaves were left by the British were slaughtered & reinslaved, after being left, by America slaveholders.

the north did NOT immediately end slavery at that time, in fact most continued having legal slavery. Only Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, governed by early 'radicals,' originally had constitutions prohibiting slavery. the ending of slavery in the north was a tough, difficult struggle, led by Quakers & early 'radicals.' In the southern colonies, slave laws were reinforced after the revolution, and slaves kept in place by armed militias.

While the ONLY part of your revisionist rant that is correct is that you got the names of two political parties correct, temporarially. The Republican Party is not recognizible today as ANYTHING approaching that early party. That political party was an amalgamation of a number of smaller, radical abolishsionist movements/parties. It was the early truly revolutionary third party, a party headed by Lincoln, who regularly corresponded with Karl Marx (a columnist with the NY Herald). It was a party that stood for ending the expansion of slavery (the US slave trade was officially ended three decades earlier). That truly left-wing, radical political party was the party of Lincoln, the party of ending slavery and carrying out the war policy of the federal govt, it was the party of a stronger federal govt. & "radical reconstruction" (certainly the opposite of what the party of that name stands for today).

You are correct that the Democratic Party of that day was the party of reaction, strongly embedded in the south, but BOTH national political parties, in the historically infamous "Deal of 1877" agreed to jointly support ending reconstruction and the brutal imposition of racist Jim Crow laws across not only the south, but nationwide.

However, it was FDR during the New Deal, that first used the power of the govt. to begin official desegregation, and for the first time since Lincoln/Grant, brought African Americans into jobs with the govt., levels of desegregation in the military. Right wing "Dixiecrats" (extreme racist southern Democrats) opposed all steps toward desegregation.

In the 1960's the civil rights movement led a huge multi-racial movement that resulted in the Voting Rights Act, desegregation, etc. HOWEVER, THOSE OLD DIXIECRATS, almost to person, led by the vicious racist Strom Thurmond, Wallace & MOST LEADING REPUBLICANS TODAY, SWITCHED PARTIES, IN PROTEST AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACTS---BECOMING REPUBLICANS. The historical switch came after LBJ helped push thru that legislation, stating that it would "cost Democrats the south for at least a generation" (which it has)! That switch was led, very consiously, by Reagon, who announced his "Southern Strategy" from a town in Mississippi made famous by a historic massacre of African Americans by racist southern whites. It was the Democratic Party that was part of the historic Civil Rights Movement, while present day Republicans have stood in opposition then, & now, to every single step toward racial equality, as well as literally ANY progressive, pro-people legislation.

African Americans are not stupid, nor are working people in general! We all can see what you all stand for today, and we vote accordingly!

two idiots, spewing their ignorant religious backward dogma at each other! ALL, both of you are attempting to make these ridiculous fairy tales into nice kids stories. they are both supporters of fanatical murders---its only the time/place that can be differant.

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 15:27:57

the koran is just as brutal, vicious & ignorant as the rest of these fairy tales. it is NOT some wonderful, humanistic believe. ALL of them are ignorant, ridiculous, backward religious fanatical nitwits---ALL religions!

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 15:23:26

Slavery was part of all early religious, but do NOT try to pull christianity away from this. The official church was the church of the roman slave empire. The church became the churc h of American slavery, becoming the ideological main support for that system.

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 15:19:59

Actually----Christians, official Christians, wrote women out of the bible, created the pogroms--murdering literally hundreds of thousands of Jews as well as creating the ideological foundation of modern (i.e. Nazi) anti-Semitism, the officially created/sanctioned the Crusades, then the children's Crusade, resulting in thousands more deaths, the inquisition was the official creation of the Catholic church, they had a literal war on science (continuing today), the war on women was literally that when the official church officially had 'witch finders' who caused the brutal death of thousands of women, poor children/Irish kids were kidnapped by those early pediphiles & sent to church run farms in Australia, where they were literal slaves to the church, remember---the early church was the made the official church of the brutal Roman slave empire, as to your ignorant homo-phobic comment, yes, the church was/still is the center of homo-phobic discrimination (from your wonderful bible), the official church was also the church of slavery, providing an ideological foundation for the muder/enslavement of African people's, it was, as well, the church of colonialism, which is the topic of this article, helping colonialists murder/maim & enslave millions more, the official Catholic Church, under Pope Pius (known by millions as "Hitler's Pope") sided with the Nazis, helping them come to power & their fingerprints are everywhere, helping those war criminals escape justice. I really cannot understand what it takes to wake folks up, when we've found out the church protected those officials working as agents of that corrupt body were raping our children. They've supported every single fascist, right-wing murdering dictator, & still do!

I could go on, but this crap that 'our religion is better' bullshit is exactly that! the truth is that radical islam is a fairly modern interpretation, generally a response to capitalist/corporate/colonial control of islamic nations. in the past Islam, not Christianity, was the tolerate, forward looking one. Point is hardly that this one or that one is "better," actually all these ridiculous, stupid religions are ALL ignorant, backward and brutal.

Posted by bruce bostick on 2015-01-17 15:13:34

So whilst the rest of the world progressed the US, well, they just pretended to progress but really after everyone else stopped they kept on keeping on with the lying, cheating, stealing and killing.

Independence Day, the day the thieves celebrate, stealing the country from the thieves who sent them to steal it and forever denied the people already living there, their independence, seriously you whacked out people celebrate it whilst emphatically denying the reality of it and you will never come good until you admit and atone for it. So End of Independence Day is far more accurate.

Posted by rtb61 on 2015-01-15 01:07:51

Good points, but the "W" sect the only legal faith in Saudi Arabia is the real problem. This monster is cuddled in Saudi land and is spread by saudi clerics. All of the terror groups follow the "W" sect. In fact the US required arab countries to allow Saiudi clerics to start schools in their countries in order to get US aid. If a country refused they would face the power of Saudi money backed by US influence. Hard to fight that trpe of pressure. The "W" sect was called a dagger pointed at the heart of Islam, which is very true. This sect will destroy any other sect that gets in its way. The battle is between secular vs non secular government colored by the battle between the "W" sect vs the other sects of Islam.It should be classed as a cult not a sect, but that would inflame Saudi Arabia and US policy.

Posted by 6384601 on 2015-01-12 07:30:08

A thoughtful person, unlike some of those commenting, would re-think many of the "truths" told to them, either in the name of Religion OR in the name of State. I agree with the premise of Mr. Goodman's article and have said as much many times over the years. It does little good to cuss or discuss the writings of the Koran or the Bible, and to praise or admonish the actions of those taken hundreds or thousands of years ago, simply as a way to justify the present. BUT there are such things as actions and consequences, and the more recent actions and their subsequent re-actions, vis-a-vis Middle East policy relating to present day circumstances. One would have to be completely ignorant of History, and the lessons that we (should) have learned, to deny that Foreign Policy is mostly dominated by corporate, not altruistic, interest. If ever a discussion of this or any similar matter should ever take place, and judging by the comments seen here, it won't be civil, it should, at the very least, be informed. The article by Mr Goodman will hopefully be the first step towards that discussion. A courageous step indeed. Let's honor that courage by trying to keep the discussion going forward, and not backwards. Please don't quote the Koran or the Bible, but do instead try to focus on foreign/military policy, and what drive them. I think you might be surprised with the answers found in an honest discussion of those two subjects, and the results might be significantly more enlightening. And it may hold the promise of a peaceful solution versus bomb throwing, both figurative and literal.

Posted by frontrowbilly on 2015-01-11 21:07:26

Mr. Goodman aptly observes: "The fact that our misguided foreign policy creates terrorism is almost never discussed in polite society."

Where is our Hedbo?

Posted by TimothyL on 2015-01-11 20:21:12

You are so dumb how dumb are your kids.usual whitey denial of the truth, they are no angels but a product of Satan

Posted by Uzoozy on 2015-01-10 17:21:35

Who cares whether the importers were Dems aod Gop.The blacks imported like cattle underwent gross mis-treatment at the hands of the white masters.They were made to shit into other mouth, way to go whitey.Blacks still are no better than at the slavery times.Now they put them in Ghettos and shoot them if/when they come out.You are an disgusting whitey, go to Phudisville and stay there for ever.

Posted by Uzoozy on 2015-01-10 13:32:27

Hitler was not a practicing Christian. He worked together with muslim people to create the extermination camps, which murdered 6 million jews and 10 million christians. He was a eugenicist socialist. NAZI meaning: National Socialism. He believed the modern state would be able to produce the perfect man--which he defined as blue-eyed, blond haired superman. He spent his energy "bettering the race" much like Margaret Sanger and other eugenicists. Muslims are eugenicists of a different sort--the Qur'an commands jihad against all infidels. The alliance between Hitler and islam furthered the command to kill jews.

Posted by greatjoy on 2015-01-10 12:33:41

Terrorism happens in muslim countries all the time. The qur'an requires terrorism to attain paradise. It also promotes killing of jews. Mohammad spent the last years of his life in murderous elimination of jews and christians. They are commanded to protect the honor of islam, and all its components, and the men are specifically given power over all women. The abject condition of most women under islam (meaning: submission) is beyond comprehension. They are considered the possession of men, and responsible for being raped (sharia law requires women to have 80 lashes and stoning for being raped.) They can be sold into "marriage" as young as the day of birth. Islamists think the prophet was merciful because he said that men should not bury their women/daughters alive, in the sand. Of course, there is no consequence for killing daughters, wives, etc in any other way. Asia Bibi, at this moment, is condemned to death for "desecrating islam." Her crime? She drank from a well designated as "muslim."

Posted by greatjoy on 2015-01-10 11:53:01

The number 110 million slave imported--is a huge number that has no basis in reality. Slaves were imported to the American colony under British rule. As soon as the Revolution happened and the United States formed, the northern state legislatures stopped the importation of slaves. They also prevented the landing of slave ships in southern states--this is one complaint that the Democrats often make. The Democrat Party was strong in the south--the southern Democrats--and when the Civil War eventually happened, (originally called the War Between the Democrats and Republicans) the Democrats were saying that the north was interfering with its "trade." It's kind of like the Democrats insisting on "choice." WHAT exactly was the "trade"--and what exactly is the "choice."?It was a long, hard battle between the Republicans and Democrats to get rid of slavery in America, and it's an ongoing struggle--with the Democrats doing everything they can to throw each generation off track and chasing the wrong ideas. We need to access original documents and chase the truth.One list of original documents are found in the Congressional record. You can access information on the votes that were taken and find that the Republicans pursue liberty of everybody, whenever they get into power. Black people did very much better under Bush than they are doing now. Look up the number of black people that became millionaires during the Bush years, and you will find that the Reagan adage is true, " A rising tide lifts all boats."However, black people continue to suffer dreadfully under The Negro Project--run by the Democrats and their media.

Posted by greatjoy on 2015-01-10 11:39:54

I grew up as a missionary kid, in Congo. The tribe we lived among, was a tribe that traditionally captured and sold other tribes into slavery--to the muslims. They also kept slaves of their own. At the time I grew up we had to evacuate several times as the master tribe decided to do massive killing of their slaves. My dad stayed behind with other missionary men, to help slaves escape. Slavery in America was started while the British controlled its American colony. They took 10s of thousands of slaves from wars they fought, and shipped them here, to work for the English crown. Those slaves were white. They also bought slaves from the muslim slave markets. (Which the Republicans led in closing down.)It was an African immigrant who was not acknowledging the end of his indentured servant's time of service, and was holding his indentured servant in slavery,--that case before a judge, got decided that the indentured servant could be owned by the master for the rest of the servant's life--that made slavery part of the law of America. Judges are one way that tyrannous decisions get made that shape the decisions that a society makes. Slavery and the people who believe they have the right to kill another person are intimately connected...when a group decides that they have the right to deprive a group of people of their right to life when there has been no crime committed, when they have done nothing wrong, that is a type of slavery. Not slavery of one owner to one slave, but governmental slavery. That is the communist model, where the individual person has no rights, and the work of the whole group brings riches to the governmental apparatus that keeps the population. When the entire work of the person belongs to the governmental employees--when all that a person produces is taken by the government, and millions of people who are employed and controlled by the government, so that all that a person can produce is stripped from them and given to the government--which has the best of everything, and nothing is ever denied to the government--that is slavery.Our founders were trying to dismantle that type of centralization of power, and many of them spoke against slavery and despised the institution of slavery...it's a vicious institution that everyone gets trapped in. One example was Thomas Jefferson. He hated slavery, but inherited slaves from his father. To release them, the contracts that had been created before he was "owner" had to be paid off. He also had to post bond for their behavior and make sure they would not be vagrant. Some owners were trapped in the contracts their fathers had created. They didn't know how to get out of the institution.

Posted by greatjoy on 2015-01-10 11:14:10

It's not the Qu'aran, Brother Goodman, it's those magazine cartoonists in France.

Posted by Louis Nayman on 2015-01-07 09:21:06

Your comments on the murder of 12 people at a magazine office today by gunmen shouting Allahu Akbar?

Posted by Adrastus Perkins on 2015-01-07 09:18:19

No. It's the Koran.

Posted by Michael Skaggs on 2015-01-05 18:38:54

" We know atheist, homo obsessed scumbags are the most hateful, classless people on the planet."

Is this you NOT being hateful? Because if it is, you really suck at it. Talk about ironic projection...

Posted by Fool_me_twice_shame_on_ME on 2015-01-05 15:22:36

"Says who? We know atheist, homo obsessed scumbags are the most hateful, classless people on the planet."

Hypocrite says what?

Posted by trog69 on 2015-01-05 05:27:17

We're still waiting for conservatives to acknowledge the pro-slavery portions of the Christian bible.

/a hole. Are you still in middle school? Grow up.

Posted by trog69 on 2015-01-05 05:20:33

There are more violent passages in the Bible clearly. But it is a longer book.

Posted by baht on 2015-01-04 21:08:13

The koran states in unequivalacle terms to free your slaves and to give the poor their due. Can you say the same for the Bible?

Posted by baht on 2015-01-04 21:05:18

I am less concerned about Jews, Muslims, Atheists and Liberals wiping out Christianity and more concerned with Christians actually following Christianity, loving their neighbors, putting down their swords and showing concern for the least of these.

Posted by StanH on 2015-01-04 20:02:05

Good post. Although war is allowed against "People of the Book" (i.e. Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians). The differentiation in the Quran is that Muslims are required to fight, expel, or kill the pagans unless they convert (e.g. the poor Yezidis) while with People of the Book are able to remain in Muslim lands if they pay the Jizyah tax to show their inferior status. The Quran is different from the Christian Bible in several respects: the Quran is the literal word of God so there is little room for interpretation (all Muslims believe this); the Quran says that it is a "clear" book (why would Allah present something that is confusing); and any contradictory verses are resolved by abrogation (with the earlier verse being superseded by the latter). Many of the kinder verses were in the early years of revelation to Muhammad and many were abrogated by later verses. Now an interesting thing is that the book is not arranged chronologically so one has to rely on outside sources (the "hadith" or sayings and actions of Mohammed; or the "sira" or history) to set them in the correct temporal order which seems to contradict the assertion by the Quran that is the perfect book.

Posted by Rhomas913 on 2015-01-04 15:52:31

It should be 462 years before the start of the First Crusade

Posted by Rhomas913 on 2015-01-04 15:33:23

I am not sure what you are saying. In 632 the prophet Mohammed died and the religion was well established in his lifetime. Soon after his death, the Muslim armies went on the offensive against Christian Europe and North Africa (not to mention Nubia which was also Christian at the time). The First Crusade was in 1096, some 462 years after the Muslim armies seized Christianity's holiest city, Jerusalem. Aisha was not too far off.

Within 100 years they conquered or attacked the following Christian populated regions:634 Jerusalem occupied 639 Armenia occupied640 Egypt (populated by Coptic Christians) occupied642 failed campaign against the Christian state of Nubia643 Tripoli (Libya) occupied647 Tunisia occupied648 - 651 Anatolia (Turkey) occupied652 raids on Sicily654 Cyprus occupied674 - 678 First failed siege of Constantinople by the Muslims711 Algeria and Morocco occupied711–718 Spain conquered717-718 Second failed siege of Constantinople by the Muslims732 Muslims defeated at Tours France736 Georgia occupied820 Crete occupied827 Southern Italy occupied1009 Fatimid caliph Al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah ordered the complete destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem which was one of the causes of the crusades1096 to 1099 The First Crusade

Posted by Rhomas913 on 2015-01-04 15:32:28

The catholics and muslim relligions are deficient towards their people: should not all catholics have Vatican citizenship and muslims Saudi citizenship and the right of return to their wealth and families?

Posted by Rdzkz on 2015-01-04 12:28:17

Christians have committed more killings, torture, terrorism, raping, looting and plundering than all other religions, including Islam, combined.

Yeah! The US Christian Military did not slaughter over one million Muslims because they were Muslims. They slaughtered them for their oil. That's not religious bigotry and hatred, that's sociopathic greed that values wealth over human life.

Posted by Kevin Schmidt on 2015-01-04 12:02:50

what? where on earth do you get "Islam attacked Europe 600 years before the first Crusade"? did you make it up? or did you just read it on a troop-supporter blog?

Posted by Menso on 2015-01-04 10:18:40

I think you're making up wrong history in your first point by stating that lowest caste people embraced Islam because they were treated like slaves. That's kinda proselytising Islam which is absolutely wrong.As far as I know, it was some Md. Qasim from Iran who first entered the subcontinent through invasion and introduced Islam as he was the ruler. Later, Islam came in forced manner in great way by Muslim invaders from Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Persia etc. As the invaders were brutal and plunderers mostly, they left no choice to live upon the defeated lot i.e. either to die or convert to Islam and took many of them as slaves. In fact, slavery in India was introduced by Muslims, not by the caste system as has been recorded by Chinese traveller Fa-hien in earlier times.And if you still believe what you mentioned, quote the book or the reference which supports your point.

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-04 09:42:37

It certainly is us, with our terrible, dangerous corporations and the gangster leaders of these corporations. But, remember, it's the Koran, too.

Posted by Steve in DC on 2015-01-04 06:35:21

Tens of thousands of years? Really? Tens of thousands of years ago people were still living in caves. Several species of humans, including Homo Sapiens, Cro Magnon, Neanderthalensis, and others, go back tens to hundreds of thousands of years, but they didn't engage in the slave trade. That odious practice began 5-6 thousand years ago.

Posted by hschulsinger on 2015-01-03 23:46:41

I'm reluctant to enter this discussion due to the extensive bigoted, ignorant comments already uttered of both pro-Islam & anti-Islam sides, though there have also been some thoughtful points made besides. Suffice it to say that I am an ex-Catholic atheist who has read BOTH the Koran & extensively on Islam's history & practice, including the barbaric use of Sharia Law in Islamic countries, as well as Ibn Warraq's must-read book, Why I Am Not a Muslim (Prometheus Press), so, as the matter appears to me, Mr. Good man, It's BOTH us, the United States government & its uneducated, uncritical citizenry, AND the Koran that fuels this self-righteous jihadist fanaticism that is an integral part & parcel of the religious practice of Islam among many of its adherents; same as the Bible is used by their fundamentalist, bigoted counterparts in Christianity. So, Mr. Goodman, it's not a matter of simple secular & political gripes against the US government that motivated these Islamic terrorists you named (btw, who seem to greatly outnumber any professed Christian political terrorists you could name (only Tim McVeigh & the Tea Party couple who killed cops in Las Vegas come to mind), or Jewish terrorists (none come to mind at all who acted outside of the boundaries of Israel/Palestine); it's also terror given religious justification. This to me is just a hallmark of RELIGIOUS fanaticism across denominational lines, part & parcel of religion, period, a point which would also be shared by Bill Maher, who is unjustly attacked on this matter; he's long skewered religious fanatics & bigots across ALL denominational lines, & cheered on by the left when he did so to Christians; but when he also appropriately skewers Islam, is subjected to grossly unfair attacks. Like Bill Maher, I am also completely opposed to bigotry against Muslims individually simply because of their religious beliefs, which are indeed stupid, but no more so that those of Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, or any other religious believer. I am a socialist who supports UNIVERSAL human rights for all practiced by all, in all countries, & would pointedly note last that, unlike ISIS, unlike the Taliban, unlike Hamas & al Qaeda, at least many of our leading Christian religious bigots, such as Pat Robertson, but also the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, do not possess either territory, armies, or weapons the way these bigoted Islamist groups do.

Posted by george_fish on 2015-01-03 16:59:44

All the scriptures of the great religions have ambiguous and violent texts that can empower righteous murder and hatred if reasons exist for them. The Quran essentially allows just wars although mostly against pagans, with "people of the book" such as Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians being exempt. There are also passages of restraint and valuing all life that are ignored by jihadis. Throughout history Muslim nations have treated Christians and Jews better than Christian nations have treated Muslims and Jews. The Bible is filled with passages that call for or approve violence, particularly in the Joshua-Judges-Kings books, but Jesus' pacifistic teachings have been set aside or ignored by Christians who control the world's most violent war machine. Religions have also been conservative forces for those who would resist social changes such as in gender roles and power relations within communities and with outsiders, as well as those who would throw off oppressors. Certainty that a powerful God is on your side is a great motivator in the face of anxiety, uncertainty and despair, whether you are Moses, MLK or bin Ladin, and particularly for people of an authoritarian bent. Jihadists have developed an interpretive narrative of Islam that has worked well for them in the face of military, economic and cultural domination by the west in what remain heavily tribal societies. There are many other interpretations that are arguably more true to the substance of the faith, and certainly less destructive. Thus of the world's 1.6 billion Moslems, only a very small percentage are jihadists, who are able to do much more harm to other Moslems than they do to American Christians and Jews. Accordingly it is not just the Koran, but it is how Western actions fit in to the narrative of oppression.

Posted by StanH on 2015-01-03 14:26:37

It is Islam. It is not based on the West's behavior. After 9/11 Bin Laden did not say the attack was for our behavior. He said it was to help spread Islam and Sharia for the entire planet. Bin Laden said that the attack was in retaliation for us stopping the slaughter of Non-Muslims in East Timor. The U.S. should conduct themselves like this more often. Muslim Jihadist treat their own people worse than they treat us. We should fight this sort of religious bigotry and hatred without the Author's need to apologize.

Posted by Bob Field on 2015-01-03 14:13:29

Criticism of Islam: The absolute height of lunacy or stuff for the loonies.Related context or Surah: "If they do not withhold their hands, seize them, and slay them, wherever you find them. A believer killeth not a believer but by mischance, and whoso killeth a believer by mischance shall be bound to free a believer from slavery; and the blood money shall be made o the family of the slain believer unless they convert it into alms. But if the slain believer be of a hostile people, let him confer freedom on a slave who is a believer. But whoever shall kill a believer of a set purpose, his recompense shall be hell, for ever shall he abide in it, God shall be wrathful with him." Surah: (4: 94-96.)Now this is the thing that I call the absolute height of prejudice and stereotyping. The Quran enjoins on its believers to kill the non-Muslim but to spare the Muslims. If they somehow do kill their co-religionists by any mischance of sort, then they shall have to make amends for it by freeing a believer from slavery (read freedom from other religion), but if they kill non-Muslim, even though it be through a mistake, they shall be perfectly liable to be allowed straight into inheriting the Heaven, hence I'm wondering whether any crime committed by a Muslim is considered a crime at all by this retard religion or not?

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-03 13:27:32

Criticism of Islam: In Islam religion the Allah (God) is nothing else but a tyrant.Related context or Surah: "Whom He pleaseth will He forgive; and whom He pleaseth will he punish; for God is All-powerful." Surah: (2:266.)Regarding this Surah of Quran I only ask does not God act like a tyrant when he does not forgive those who deserve forgiveness and forgives those who are not worthy of being forgiven? The soul should not be held responsible for its actions, if God makes one virtuous or wicked just as he pleases, nor should the soul, therefore, be endowed with happiness or afflicted with pain and suffering just as soldier if he kills a person under the direction of his superior officer is not held responsible for his act. Maybe the rules of this tyrant religion absolves all these paradoxes.

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-03 13:15:20

Criticism of Islam: Slaying non-muslims and innocent animals to be on Allah’s path.Context text or Surah: "God is severe in chastising. Follow not the steps of Satan, He only enjoineth upon you evil and wickedness and that ye should aver of God that which ye know not." Surah: (2: 164, 165.)Regarding this Surah I just say that did your God punish the wicked and reward the virtuous, or does he show mercy to the only the Muslims and torture others? If it's the latter, then he is not God. But if your God is not partial (to yours), he will reward the virtuous and punish the wicked despite the fact that, whatever religion they may profess. This being the case, the belief in the Quran and in Mohammad (as the prophet of God) becomes unnecessary. Why did God create Satan - the enemy of the human race who has been tempting all mankind. Is He not cognizant of the future? If you argue that, he has created Satan just to try man, it cannot be right, because only one who is possessed of finite knowledge would do such a thing; while One who is Omniscient is not supposed to act that way.

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-03 13:08:40

Criticism of Islam: Slaying non-muslims and innocent animals to be on Allah’s path.Context text or Surah: "And say not of those who are slain on God's path that they are dead, nay, they are living! But ye understand not." Surah: (2:149)Regarding this Surah of Quran I have to say that, where is the necessity of slaying other and of being slain on God's path? Why do you just not say plainly that all this is meant for accomplishing your selfish ends? Was it not wrong that you hold out this inducement to people that they may fight well and help you to gain victory over your enemies and acquire wealth and power by looting other and thereby enable you to live in luxury and enjoy sensual pleasures.

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-03 13:04:00

Criticism of Islam: INTOLERANCE TOWARDS NON-MUSLIMSContext text or Surah: "Praise be to God, the Lord of all creatures, the Compassionate, the Merciful." Surah: (1: 1, 2.)In that context relating to the said Surah of Quran I had just this to say that, if the God of the Quran been the Lord of all creatures, and been Merciful and kind to all, he would never have commanded the Muslims to slaughter men of other faiths, and animals, etc. If he was as Merciful as being told, will he ever show mercy even to the sinners? If the answer be given in the affirmative, it cannot be true, because further on it is said in the Quran that "Put Infidels to sword," in other words, he that does not believe in the Quran and the Prophet Mohammad is an infidel (he should, therefore, be put to death). (Since the Quran sanctions such cruelty to non-Muslims and innocent creatures such as cows) it can never be termed the Word of God.

Posted by Munna on 2015-01-03 12:57:08

Jay your an idiot plain an simple. Your arguments are very childish and you need to seriously start reading books instead of listening to Christian Zionist extremists. I will educate your dumb ass,

1- Islam freed slaves,in fact the first person to come to Islam was a slave after the prophet (pbuh). If you look in India their is a caste system, the lowest caste embraced Islam because they were treated like slaves. This is still currently going on, please wikipedia untouchables of india.

2- Every religion has passages that can hateful and violent, but it is always based on a context. You take one verse like an idiot and then come up to a conclusion.

3- Jews and Muslims lived side by side, it was christians who prosecuted the jews and commited the holocaust ala Hitler who WAS A PRACTICING CHRISTIAN,

I invite you to stop being a ignorant fool and read books and have an open mind.

Posted by Nishanth Patingar on 2015-01-01 21:19:53

the article was not about bringing peace and tranquility in the muslim world it was about the blowbacks the western countries are feeling because of their involvement in the muslim world. to be clear nothing justifies the actions of aq or isis

Posted by a.z on 2015-01-01 15:15:50

You forget, Jay, that the ancient Greeks and Romans had slaves long before the Prophet Mohammed was even born. The Roman Empire acquired - through conquest - mostly white slaves from areas such as Gaul, Britain, and parts of Italy, the Balkans, and Germany, as well as slaves from the Eastern and Southern Mediterranean regions.

Posted by Eileen Kuch on 2015-01-01 15:03:48

Reading these comments I wonder, are we paying the Muslims for their oil or not, if not they have reason to hate us and our freedom to take what we want from them. If the oil is being paid for their problem is with their own leaders.

I believe the breakup of the Muslim Empire was caused by rival factions within the Islamic world, there exists now no unity, so making blanket statements about muslims is bs, you would need to state which sect or group was being referred to.There is no unified Islamic state. Islam means submission, so an Islamic state would be a state of submission.

Keep them out of here, we already have a lot of wack job religions.Why do we want people who won't fight to make their own country a better place, their own religion a better religion, indoctrination, and belief are two very different things. Indoctrination produces fanatics. They do not believe or they would not leave, unless they are cowards or have an agenda.

Posted by Fred Wahlstrom on 2015-01-01 14:35:37

Oh, absolutely. If the US would only withdraw from the ME entirely and end its support for Israel and "friendly" Islamic nations, there would be peace and tranquility across the region and throughout the Muslim world. Because as we know, the followers of Islam never quarrel among themselves and fundamentalist sects like Boko Haram would simply cease to exist.

Posted by sukietawdry on 2015-01-01 13:42:06

Yeah it has nothing to do with Islam and the Koran at all, this article is so precious. It ignores the fact that the vast majority of victims of religious violence are Muslims themselves, living in predominately Muslim countries. This was happening long before US hegemony.

Posted by V S on 2015-01-01 13:35:28

Yes, obviously revenge for what the US has done to them. But unfortunately it's a vicious circle now and any new revenge attack against the US will renew hate by Americans, rather than learning to leave the Arabian peninsula and end it all. It will continue until the US suffers an attack upon Americans that can't be endured. In the form of a mushroom cloud as Condo Rice puts it?

Posted by straightgoods on 2015-01-01 12:52:51

You figures make a liar out of you. Islam didn't exict until aroun 650 at the earliest, and Muhammed was pissed off about the people refusing to listen to him. It was over 100 years before it really took root, so adding your 600 years to the 750, would make the first crusades in the 1350 era. Islam, like Christianity and Judiaism existed in Eurpoe, but it was the Roman church which decided to attack all religions and people who did not adhere to Christianity. The Roman church said "Kill them all, let god sort them out."

Posted by P. Bru on 2015-01-01 06:39:45

Have you ever read Joshua? Your "god" told Joshua and his gang to kill every Canaanite they possibly could, men, women, children, babies, slaves, everyone so that "his children" could live there. YA gotta love a god like that! I prefer Aphrodite in her pretty see thru nightie. Her rituals are much more loving, and she won't send you to hell to burn forever if you don't choose her.

Posted by P. Bru on 2015-01-01 06:29:50

Piss Christ, not Piss Mohammed. Funded by the US government. That is one example.

Posted by CarbonaNotGlue on 2015-01-01 04:04:02

What even this author apparently can't bring himself to say, is that opposition to U.S. support for Israel's brutal occupation united the group that attacked us on 9/11.

See Robert Fisk's reporting on this at http://www.independent.co.uk/v..., quoting authors Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan as follows: "All the evidence ... indicates that Palestine was the factor that united the conspirators – at every level," they write. One of the organisers of the attack believed it would make Americans concentrate on "the atrocities that America is committing by supporting Israel". Palestine, the authors state, "was certainly the principal political grievance ... driving the young Arabs (who had lived) in Hamburg".

Posted by bushfatigue on 2015-01-01 00:07:47

Islam attacked Europe 600 years before the first Crusade. Islam does what it has always done. The guilt is with the West for not exterminating this global evil 100 years ago. Guilt over the Holocaust lead to the insanity of importing our historic enemy as migrants and refugees. Pathological altruism blinds the elites to the true nature of Islam.

Posted by aisha on 2014-12-31 23:57:23

Long before the USA existed Muslims were quite busy being disgusting pirates, raiders and slavers. Was that jihadish behavior done in anticipation of the future evil of the USA?

Posted by David412 on 2014-12-31 21:52:13

Jay, Since you are not able to handle Mr Goodman's criticism, you are maybe not the best authority on criticizing others?

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 15:21:07

If Christianitywas being bludgeoned, you'd be able to quote sources. It is not happening, hence no sources. Cite your sources, or your argument is invalid.

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 15:18:11

Well, since you seem to have read these scholarly sources, it should not be a problem for you to cite them. Without citation, your arguments are invalid. You are living In a fantasy hate-filled world, and projecting that darkness onto others.

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 15:05:36

So why do many a hole liberals, atheists, and muslims hold christianity responsible for it as if it was something that started a few hundred years ago? Is it because they HATE christians?

Slavery was part of islam from the prophet himself and is responsible fir the success of its spread; literally 1000 years before the Christians ravaged the same continent for the same reason. How come no one talks about that.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 11:16:20

There are plenty out there. Do give me your chocolate covered islam. Plenty of stuff out there from Muslim and scholarly sources. It is a fact of history that muslims were involved in african slavetrade. Also, why do you qutoe "corrupt" scripture to me? You muslims spend khutbas attacking it.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:53:12

Why nit read the history

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:48:36

Muslims love what allah loves and hate what allah hates. There are plenty of surahs that contain aiyats with some of the hateful passages against nonbelievers. Muslims may not hate as much as their god, but they do it inadvertently when they recite alfatiha several times a day.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:47:22

Says who? We know atheist, homo obsessed scumbags are the most hateful, classless people on the planet. Show me the hate filled passages in the bible and compare it to the quran where it speaks negatively of specific groups that still exist today. You can defend the muslims all you want, but you are a kaffir to them.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:44:25

What a bunch of bull. The lib media and atheists hold no punches bludgeoning Christianity whenever it gets the chance. Islamic dawah is not short of attacks against christianity when it comes to spreading islam; holidays included. Dont apeak of what you would like the facts to be.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:40:14

So when will you muslima have the couragw of self criticism? You muslims only like people that speak things you want to hear, otherwise me.goodman here is a worthless dhimmi destined for helfire; the worst of all creatures.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 10:33:30

very nice article and I really appreciate Mr. LEONARD C. GOODMAN for this amazing article. Western world especially America need to understand this truth.

Posted by Abdurezak Mohammed on 2014-12-31 09:01:06

Every single one of those groups is oppressed in the old and new testaments; and even more so by self-described Christians.

Posted by Christopher Kelley on 2014-12-31 08:44:11

There are many who might say the Bible [from which I am guessing you are quoting] is a hate-spewing document in its own right, as it was written by man and had been edited and hacked apart to the whims of royals and the Vatican for hundreds of years.

Posted by Christopher Kelley on 2014-12-31 08:43:24

Nah, not really. Islam took root in 634 (?). Slavery was a part of life for tens of thousands of years before that.

Posted by Christopher Kelley on 2014-12-31 08:41:54

It's still going on, at least in the western coastal countries of Africa: children are tendered over to chocolate and coffee plantations by their parents to labor while the parents get a small wage sent back to them in their home countries. White slavery is still something American woman are not being educated on: Marseilles, France and Barcelona, Spain are two areas where white woman should be wary about wnadering around unescorted. The Playboy Foundation has - or at used to - bang the drum on this, albeit to deaf ears in the hallowed halls of Capital Hill.

Posted by Christopher Kelley on 2014-12-31 08:40:39

Really people...Christianity is not under attack, especially in America. We have TWO months of a "Christmas Season," every single year with no signs of it diminishing. We are barely past Halloween and Christmas decorations start going up. It is a fantastical concept that is actually pushed by Fox News to get people riled up and to keep focus away from the real issues facing the average American.

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 08:02:07

what history lesson? There is no historical scholarly evidence of your claims. Just because some hate-spewing website says it is, doesn't make it so. I would suggest doing some actual research; maybe it will bring some peace to your mind. Beware of those who spread hate and misinformation. Proverbs 19:9 - A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who breathes out lies will perish.

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 07:56:38

so, no actual historical context, or in-context references from the Quran, just a belief that Muslims hate others? Even your interpretation of inter-faith support is skewed by some odd belief that support is a zero-sum game. Why do you have so much hatred for Jews and Muslims (no such thing as Muhammadans, btw)?

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-31 07:52:15

Why do muhammadans talk about hate as if there is no concept of it in tgeir religion? No one hates and then speaks pleasurably about the plans for the hated more than your allah.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 07:04:43

A history lesson starting from your prophet, to his sahaba, and then his successors.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 07:00:11

Yet they hold no punches when it comes to Christianity and the freedom of speech to shamelessly bash it. Its a jew, atheust, and liberal thing.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-31 06:57:58

I'm always astounded by the gymnastics leftists perform in defense of muslims/islam. Here we have the worst religion/ideology in the world, one that oppresses women, homos, non-muslims, children even animals (pigs and dogs in particular), and yet the liberal marxists leninists of amerika will not put up with criticism of the islamofascists.

Posted by viva la migra on 2014-12-31 02:45:21

really? that is your comeback? Hate much?

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-30 21:23:43

source?

Posted by Sohail Khwaja on 2014-12-30 21:22:16

SHANDA !

Posted by Warner on 2014-12-30 19:34:18

I wonder how mnay vlacks know about the tens of millions of rgeir ancestors taken as slaves by the arab muslims and castrated to never reproduce, 1000 years before the whites? Everything you accise the west of can be attributed to the muslim people.

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-30 19:21:25

You are absolutely right in your thought process, the Western world wants chaos and fighting in the middle east, Osama Bin Laden was one person, who allegedly perpetrated the WTC attack, which he did not, as a result millions of people were displaced and killed.Palestinians got the short end of the stick living in restricted space so that the 51st state will have more space.World has been unfair to Islam and Muslims. Blacks should love America because they imported 110 million slaves and only 11 million arrived, they were the fodder for the sharks.Indian tribes they destroyed by marches, infected blankets, cutting of breasts of women for pouches,I do not to say no more, I do wonder how they can live with themselves, no wonder they are not happy.And they say Its all the fault of the Muslims , why do Muslims not love Americans I wonder.

Posted by Uzoozy on 2014-12-30 14:32:29

This has been going on since 1922 when British colonialism arbitrarily set boundaries across the Arabian Peninsula; when such things were not even part of the Bedouin nations, to whom members swore allegiances to their sheiks and not to "central governments." This continued through a series of treaties set up by Western governments into the late 40's when in 1948 Palestine was invaded by the UN to settle Israeli refugees from post-Nazi Europe. Such an action could be equated to storming into New Jersey and kicking everybody out to resettle the Lenape, Algonquin, Munsee and Powhatan indians who lost it to quasi-genocidal invasion.

Posted by Christopher Kelley on 2014-12-30 12:37:03

Stop being a dhimmi for the muslims, libterd

Posted by Jay Shawn on 2014-12-30 10:56:00

Nothing is ever the quran, right? Nothing ever has anything to do with islam right? You lefty jews are the problem.